Lost hope that Obama is going to win?

[MrPinks]

This new article from Yahoo is really depressing and seems to suggest that a win for Obama is pretty much impossible. Anyone else feel like it is a losing battle?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080830/...eground_stakes

[Libertine]

Nah. Obama will win.

Even the polls are mostly agreeing:
http://electoral-vote.com/

[fatfoo]

Probably will win...

[headless ghost]

all this crap the media is writing means nothing.
a hell of a lot can happen between now and the election.

[klaze]

I have a lot of american's on my forums that believe in creationism and hate blacks..

but I don't think it's enough..

[split_joel]

You guys are stupid if you think Obama is going to lose and this is why.

John McCain, is not favored by hardcore conservatives, he is more liberal in many ways and it turned off a lot of the party. Although John McCain thought he was doing the right thing by picking a woman Conservative for VP it did not work the way he thought. If you talk with many Conservatives they do not like the fact that the VP is an unknown and has turned off even more people who were independent and now are looking to either not vote or vote for Obama. If McCain would of choosen Romney it would of been over for Obama simple fact.

Polls will show a continue decline in John McCains ratings, and unless he can pull something off during the debates its over. I do not think this will happen because McCain is not a strong speaker.

Also, if you think about it. Why would the GOP choose such a weak candidate to run for President of the united states. The reason being is they actually want to lose this election in the hope that Obama will fuck up this country, which he will most likly do same as McCain leaving 2012 open for a strong conserative canidate to run in 2012.

[aico]

Funny, I just read an article on Yahoo that says McCain is desperately losing and it shows.

[baddog]

McCain is trying to give it to him. This election seems like a game of hot potato, no one seems to really want to win.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by MrPinks

This new article from Yahoo is really depressing and seems to suggest that a win for Obama is pretty much impossible. Anyone else feel like it is a losing battle?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080830/...eground_stakes

Of course the news says that to keep it interesting. Mccain picked palin because the old man knew he was going to lose big It takes away the whole argument Im putting country first and the inexperience issue. I was on a right wing site some are not thrilled with her and as far as lack of experience. They said she makes obama look like George C Marshall. I know because you hear the extremists you think they are all like that. Most republicans are moderate and she is an extremist.

[tony286]

I think if Mitt didnt try to out conservative the conservatives and if he ran on Im a businessman that can work with both sides of the aisle. I think he would of been our next president.

[IllTestYourGirls]

Originally Posted by baddog

McCain is trying to give it to him. This election seems like a game of hot potato, no one seems to really want to win.

I think you are right. The left always sucks but this time around it looks like the both are sucking at playing the game to win.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

I think you are right. The left always sucks but this time around it looks like the both are sucking at playing the game to win.

The Democrats should have had it in the bag, but in the rush to be different their frontrunners are a black guy with no experience and a chick many hate. So the potato gets tossed to McCain.

McCain picks a chick with even less experience and tosses it back to them.

I knew I should have ran.

[MrPinks]

That's possible

Originally Posted by baddog

McCain is trying to give it to him. This election seems like a game of hot potato, no one seems to really want to win.

[IllTestYourGirls]

Originally Posted by baddog

The Democrats should have had it in the bag, but in the rush to be different their frontrunners are a black guy with no experience and a chick many hate. So the potato gets tossed to McCain.

McCain picks a chick with even less experience and tosses it back to them.

I knew I should have ran.

That and the dems got voted into congress did nothing they said they would and now have an approval rating of 9%. If the dems had grown some balls and at least made it look like they were trying to do what they said they would Obama could have won the election by 15 or more %.

[split_joel]

Originally Posted by baddog

The Democrats should have had it in the bag, but in the rush to be different their frontrunners are a black guy with no experience and a chick many hate. So the potato gets tossed to McCain.

McCain picks a chick with even less experience and tosses it back to them.

I knew I should have ran.

Your 100% it looks as if McCain is trying to throw the election and few conserative talk host believe the same thing.

You should run, I may not agree with some of the things u say but i think ud be a better conservative then mccain

[baddog]

Originally Posted by split_joel

You should run, I may not agree with some of the things u say but i think ud be a better conservative then mccain

A little late in the game, and contrary to your assumption, I am not that much of a conservative.

[SoloGirlsContent]

Obama will win by a landslide.
Surely the mcCain lovers on here need to take Pause..
THis bitch Sarah Palin is a Jesus NUT..
You can kiss PORN GOODBYE if they win..find another job

OBAMA/BIDEN all the way, Not even close

[split_joel]

Originally Posted by baddog

A little late in the game, and contrary to your assumption, I am not that much of a conservative.

I think you are when it comes to people like obama or mccain running for president of the united states.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by baddog

The Democrats should have had it in the bag, but in the rush to be different their frontrunners are a black guy with no experience and a chick many hate. So the potato gets tossed to McCain.

McCain picks a chick with even less experience and tosses it back to them.

I knew I should have ran.

I really love to know where you get the idea Obama has no experience. He has 12 years of govt experience. 10 of them were of course at the state level but it's experience non the less.

George Bush Jr only had 6 years of govt experience prior to being elected. Obama has twice as much as what our current pres had when he entered the WH.

Clinton only had I think it was 10 years.. Again all at the state level.

In fact most of our former pres's are in the 10 to 12 year range and JFK was one of the only ones to have all federal experience prior to getting elected.

[kane]

Baddog is right. Every election is seems the democrats find a new and interesting way of losing. This year things looked good for them, but they rushed to be different and historic and that hurt them. But McCain keeps shooting himself in the foot and I feel his VP pick is a hail mary of sorts and may have him falling flat on his face.

If you look at that electoral-vote.com site you can see the big story. The nationwide polls mean nothing. There are around 6-8 states that Bush won easy in the last two elections and are typically republican strong hold states. Obama has put them in play. This means McCain will have to spend a lot of time and money just defending them and he has not taken away and Democrat stronghold states. McCain will have a big disadvantage in money as well. That site also made a great point the other day. All Obama has to do is win the states Kerry won (most of which he has decent lead in) and then win any one of about 6 or 7 toss up states and he wins while McCain has to defend his states and win most of the toss up states. Sure Obama has to win Penn and Mich to win, but the Dems have won them in the last 2 election and he has a decent lead in those states. Biden has roots in Penn and will be a huge asset there as well.

It isn't going to be easy for either, but both sides know these states are key.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by Libertine

Nah. Obama will win.

Even the polls are mostly agreeing:
http://electoral-vote.com/

Dayyummm! Why are all the red states places that I wouldn't want to be caught
dead or alive in.

And I'm not basing this on politics, just on where I never want to be because
the place sucks.

[stickyfingerz]

Good Lord the Deja Vu in this thread is crazy. Did I backslide to 2004?

[GetSCORECash]

The election is still too far. I wouldn't put Obama down yet. Nor would I say McCain is going to win. After labor day we will see the first polls... but even then things will change.

[notoldschool]

Originally Posted by klaze

I have a lot of american's on my forums that believe in creationism and hate blacks..

but I don't think it's enough..

Well thats all of ten people so im not too worried.

[SoloGirlsContent]

Originally Posted by SCORE-Cash

The election is still too far. I wouldn't put Obama down yet. Nor would I say McCain is going to win. After labor day we will see the first polls... but even then things will change.

McCain pick a dumb ass right wing nutjob a heartbeat away from a 72 y/o heart

Her videos sum up the GOP choice..she won't pull 1 Hillary vote in

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_122367.html

[robfantasy]

if u didnt already know.. the president is just a puppet

the puppet masters have power and money at stake.

the vice presidential pick is not made by the candidate on a whim but is made by the party based on analysis upon analysis of data which spits out a candidate.


and apparently this vp is what appeals more to the people in which the republicans need to win.

everyone knows the logical choice would have been romney, but even losing the voters who say fuck mccain over this decision, those voters will not go out and vote for obama.. and the number who do are so small it is irrelevant.

this is nothing but a chess game.

it is very sad that this is how politics are and that our elections are just a glorified american idol.

[Snake Doctor]

This article was written by the same Babington asshat that Keith Olbermann excoriated during the Democratic convention.

I think it's really stupid that a wire service is doing analysis. Pretty soon there won't be any news anywhere without some kind of slant to it.

First the AP is doing analysis (thanks to Ron Fournier) and next I guess NPR and the BBC will start offering opinion pieces and blogs and a talk radio format too.
It's a fucking shame really. The non-sourced opinionated bullshit is flourishing and real news organizations with editors and standards are all going bankrupt.

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by simonsyinister

Obama will win by a landslide.
Surely the mcCain lovers on here need to take Pause..
THis bitch Sarah Palin is a Jesus NUT..
You can kiss PORN GOODBYE if they win..find another job

OBAMA/BIDEN all the way, Not even close

Yeah because the Vice President of the United States has the power to shut down all pornography related websites. It's in the constitution.

I really worry about the decline civics education at our public schools.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Pretty soon there won't be any news anywhere without some kind of slant to it.

That was sarcasm, right?

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by baddog

That was sarcasm, right?

I wish.

I realize cable news is going to have slant one way or the other....but network newscasts, and wire services that feed the nation's newspapers should just be information and not opinion or analysis of that information.

Hundreds of newspapers print stories off the AP wire without even reading them, it's that automatic. They should be held to a higher standard than cable news or talk radio.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

I wish.

I realize cable news is going to have slant one way or the other....but network newscasts, and wire services that feed the nation's newspapers should just be information and not opinion or analysis of that information.

Hundreds of newspapers print stories off the AP wire without even reading them, it's that automatic. They should be held to a higher standard than cable news or talk radio.

All news has a slant and always has.

[Pornwolf]

It's still a bit early but I have to say that it's definitely not looking good for McCain right now.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Yeah because the Vice President of the United States has the power to shut down all pornography related websites. It's in the constitution.

I really worry about the decline civics education at our public schools.

I doubt Simon has ever been inside a school much less attended one.

[EmpireAutopilot]

Originally Posted by kane

Baddog is right. Every election is seems the democrats find a new and interesting way of losing. This year things looked good for them, but they rushed to be different and historic and that hurt them. But McCain keeps shooting himself in the foot and I feel his VP pick is a hail mary of sorts and may have him falling flat on his face.

If you look at that electoral-vote.com site you can see the big story. The nationwide polls mean nothing. There are around 6-8 states that Bush won easy in the last two elections and are typically republican strong hold states. Obama has put them in play. This means McCain will have to spend a lot of time and money just defending them and he has not taken away and Democrat stronghold states. McCain will have a big disadvantage in money as well. That site also made a great point the other day. All Obama has to do is win the states Kerry won (most of which he has decent lead in) and then win any one of about 6 or 7 toss up states and he wins while McCain has to defend his states and win most of the toss up states. Sure Obama has to win Penn and Mich to win, but the Dems have won them in the last 2 election and he has a decent lead in those states. Biden has roots in Penn and will be a huge asset there as well.

It isn't going to be easy for either, but both sides know these states are key.

Seriously, how do you people get so fucking stupid?

"Every election is seems the democrats find a new and interesting way of losing. This year things looked good for them, but they rushed to be different and historic and that hurt them."

Well fuck, if you call registering record numbers of Democrats AND getting them to the polls, raising record breaking amounts of money and inspiring the whole world "hurt" then I guess you have a fucking point. Never mind that Obama leads the polls and will stomp McCain, this guy speaking to 80,000 people at a time is fucking it up for the Dems!

Do you even think before you type?

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by baddog

All news has a slant and always has.

I disagree.

National Public Radio is great. So is the BBC. Also, if you have XM radio, the station POTUS 08 has been outstanding for the few hours I've listened to it, no slant at all that I could detect.
Network newscasts were also unbiased at one time, until the 24 hour news cycle changed news from being a money loser that the network had to do, into a profit center.
Networks are still alot better than cable news, but they're not as good as they once were.

Traditional print media is also a great source of information, although it is getting a little crowded with "opinion pieces", but at least they go as far as to label those pieces "opinion".
The reason I believe you can trust print media is that they are subject to libel suits, so they have standards and editorial practices that they must follow before printing a story.

Cable "news" and talk radio get away with their shit by hiding behind terms like "commentator" and "entertainment" while winking and trying to pass themselves off as news sources.

Anyways, the truth is out there for those that really want it. Some of my favorite bookmarks
mediamatters.org
factcheck.org
cjr.org

[tony286]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

I disagree.

National Public Radio is great. So is the BBC. Also, if you have XM radio, the station POTUS 08 has been outstanding for the few hours I've listened to it, no slant at all that I could detect.
Network newscasts were also unbiased at one time, until the 24 hour news cycle changed news from being a money loser that the network had to do, into a profit center.
Networks are still alot better than cable news, but they're not as good as they once were.

Traditional print media is also a great source of information, although it is getting a little crowded with "opinion pieces", but at least they go as far as to label those pieces "opinion".
The reason I believe you can trust print media is that they are subject to libel suits, so they have standards and editorial practices that they must follow before printing a story.

Cable "news" and talk radio get away with their shit by hiding behind terms like "commentator" and "entertainment" while winking and trying to pass themselves off as news sources.

Anyways, the truth is out there for those that really want it. Some of my favorite bookmarks
mediamatters.org
factcheck.org
cjr.org

You are right, I remember as a kid the news wasn't entertainment it was very dry. Old men gave the news not their opinion.I have to disagree about factcheck it seems like slam obamacheck .

[kane]

Originally Posted by EmpireAutopilot

Seriously, how do you people get so fucking stupid?

"Every election is seems the democrats find a new and interesting way of losing. This year things looked good for them, but they rushed to be different and historic and that hurt them."

Well fuck, if you call registering record numbers of Democrats AND getting them to the polls, raising record breaking amounts of money and inspiring the whole world "hurt" then I guess you have a fucking point. Never mind that Obama leads the polls and will stomp McCain, this guy speaking to 80,000 people at a time is fucking it up for the Dems!

Do you even think before you type?

I guess we will see. Here are a few examples of what I am saying from the past.

Example #1 - Gore V Bush 2000: Gore is basically handed the presidency on a silver platter. Clinton is very popular as he leave office and Gore is a sure thing. The republicans are running a guy who is a short term governor and a bad governor at that. A guy who has failed at just about everything he has ever tried. It should be a slam dunk. But Gore refuses to let Clinton help him and he won't fight dirty and it costs him. If Gore attacked Bush's past record and let Clinton do his thing he could have won.

Example #2 - Kerry V Bush 2004: Bush is very unpopular. The economy is in the shiter and things are looking bad for us globally. Kerry comes out strong and seems very presidential. The guy can speak and debates well and is a decorated military veteran. The Bush hits him with the swift boat stuff and Kerry, for reasons known only to him, decides he isn't going to fight back. Guess what? The people want to vote for someone that will fight for them and stand up for them and if Kerry won't defend himself how will he defend us? So, as we know, he loses.

Now another golden opportunity awaits. Bush has all times low approval ratings (historic lows even) and republicans are being indicted left and right. The country is sick of them and things are not going well. So what do the democrats do? They decide to penalize Florida and Michigan for moving their primaries up. No matter that it was republicans that moved the date up, they still decide to penalize the state and basically tell the voters of those states, "You can vote, but the votes won't count." This may not have mattered if Hillary had done as many predicted and ran away with the nomination from day one. Much to everyone's shock Obama puts up a fight and suddenly, guess what, Florida and Michigan matter. Hillary wins both of those states. Never mind that she was the only one on the ballot in one of them and the only one that, against the will of the DNC, went to Florida. She still won them, but they don't count so what do we get from this? We get a group of people that are so pissed they will vote for McCain just because they think Hillary got screwed and they want the DNC to pay. Factor into that the reality that somewhere around lat January when people started realizing that Obama wasn't going to go away the campaign somehow left normalcy and became this, "historic" movement. There was suddenly a ton of focus on the historic significance of what we were seeing and less and less paid to what these people were saying. They had the eyes of the nation on them and they bickered back and fourth at each other like a couple of school kids. Obama finally did the right thing when he just started ignoring Hillary and acting like he was the nominee and got back on message, but this left a door for McCain and the republicans.

Obama has been brilliant since it was clear that he was going to be the nominee. He has registered a lot of voters and got them out to the polls. We will see if he can do it again in November. Recent history shows the democrats do a great job of registering people, but many of them don't turn out on election day. If the democrats lose this election, another election that basically handed to them, you have to look back on a few things as the cause. First is the debacle with Florida and Michigan and second is some people from the party not sitting Hillary and Obama down and telling them to play nice instead of ripping each other apart and making some independents hate both of them.

Obama is a rock star. He speaks to 80,000 at a time while McCain is lucky to draw 1,000. He will raise maybe twice or three time the money that McCain will, that doesn't mean he will win. I think he will, but there is no guarantee and he sure as didn't get much help from his party early on.

[marketsmart]

Barack Obama will win the election, its that simple..

a get a chuckle out of people that parrot everything they hear in the media...

the media cares less about the facts and worries more about ratings...

[Mr. Blue]

It will all come down to the debates. I honestly believe the debates will be crucial for Obama, if he can even remotely add specificity to his thoughts, he?ll win, if he says he?ll do this, this, and that, but not giving specifics of how he?ll accomplish it, he?ll lose.

I thought his speech was decent, but you have to step back and realize it was a good speech because he promised to cure so many ills in America that you have to stop and go?wait?how are you going to pay for all this? I know he addressed how he?d pay for it, but let?s face it, politicians always say they?ll go through the federal budget and find savings, blah blah blah?I want more specifics.

So, if Obama can be a little specific, doesn?t have to be overly specific, he?ll win?if he does the idealized dream type stuff, he?ll lose.

I'll most likely be voting Nader again, I basically hate Republicans and Democrats...so I'll vote for someone else in hopes that someday America will wake the fuck up because the two party system is broken in a big way. (Granted I'm in NY...so I know Obama will win there, if I was in a battleground state I'd be paying a little more attention, lol).

[Manowar]

Originally Posted by simonsyinister

You can kiss PORN GOODBYE if they win..find another job

bit of an exagerration there

[tony286]

Originally Posted by kane

I guess we will see. Here are a few examples of what I am saying from the past.

Example #1 - Gore V Bush 2000: Gore is basically handed the presidency on a silver platter. Clinton is very popular as he leave office and Gore is a sure thing. The republicans are running a guy who is a short term governor and a bad governor at that. A guy who has failed at just about everything he has ever tried. It should be a slam dunk. But Gore refuses to let Clinton help him and he won't fight dirty and it costs him. If Gore attacked Bush's past record and let Clinton do his thing he could have won.

Example #2 - Kerry V Bush 2004: Bush is very unpopular. The economy is in the shiter and things are looking bad for us globally. Kerry comes out strong and seems very presidential. The guy can speak and debates well and is a decorated military veteran. The Bush hits him with the swift boat stuff and Kerry, for reasons known only to him, decides he isn't going to fight back. Guess what? The people want to vote for someone that will fight for them and stand up for them and if Kerry won't defend himself how will he defend us? So, as we know, he loses.

Now another golden opportunity awaits. Bush has all times low approval ratings (historic lows even) and republicans are being indicted left and right. The country is sick of them and things are not going well. So what do the democrats do? They decide to penalize Florida and Michigan for moving their primaries up. No matter that it was republicans that moved the date up, they still decide to penalize the state and basically tell the voters of those states, "You can vote, but the votes won't count." This may not have mattered if Hillary had done as many predicted and ran away with the nomination from day one. Much to everyone's shock Obama puts up a fight and suddenly, guess what, Florida and Michigan matter. Hillary wins both of those states. Never mind that she was the only one on the ballot in one of them and the only one that, against the will of the DNC, went to Florida. She still won them, but they don't count so what do we get from this? We get a group of people that are so pissed they will vote for McCain just because they think Hillary got screwed and they want the DNC to pay. Factor into that the reality that somewhere around lat January when people started realizing that Obama wasn't going to go away the campaign somehow left normalcy and became this, "historic" movement. There was suddenly a ton of focus on the historic significance of what we were seeing and less and less paid to what these people were saying. They had the eyes of the nation on them and they bickered back and fourth at each other like a couple of school kids. Obama finally did the right thing when he just started ignoring Hillary and acting like he was the nominee and got back on message, but this left a door for McCain and the republicans.

Obama has been brilliant since it was clear that he was going to be the nominee. He has registered a lot of voters and got them out to the polls. We will see if he can do it again in November. Recent history shows the democrats do a great job of registering people, but many of them don't turn out on election day. If the democrats lose this election, another election that basically handed to them, you have to look back on a few things as the cause. First is the debacle with Florida and Michigan and second is some people from the party not sitting Hillary and Obama down and telling them to play nice instead of ripping each other apart and making some independents hate both of them.

Obama is a rock star. He speaks to 80,000 at a time while McCain is lucky to draw 1,000. He will raise maybe twice or three time the money that McCain will, that doesn't mean he will win. I think he will, but there is no guarantee and he sure as didn't get much help from his party early on.

Use of the word rockstar makes it like its all very empty.He is a special guy that can connect with people on a large scale. That's a gift and a sign of a great leader. When I listened to that speech at the convention, for the first time in my life. I was watching someone run for political office that I would take a bullet for.

[GetSCORECash]

Originally Posted by Libertine

Nah. Obama will win.

Even the polls are mostly agreeing:
http://electoral-vote.com/

You need to wait till Tuesday. This Sarah VP pot is going to put McCain on top. But I'm sure that by the end of September Obama will come back on top.

[kane]

Originally Posted by tony404

Use of the word rockstar makes it like its all very empty.He is a special guy that can connect with people on a large scale. That's a gift and a sign of a great leader. When I listened to that speech at the convention, for the first time in my life. I was watching someone run for political office that I would take a bullet for.

I guess I meant rockstar in the way that people want to be close to him. They want to hear what he has to say and he has a strong charisma. People are drawn to him in the way that they are drawn to rockstars.

I thought his speech was fantastic, but there are only a few people on this planet I'm willing to take a bullet for and he isn't on the list

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by tony404

You are right, I remember as a kid the news wasn't entertainment it was very dry. Old men gave the news not their opinion.I have to disagree about factcheck it seems like slam obamacheck .

They're pretty even handed IMO, and I'm a HUGE Obama supporter.

Right now there are 10 things on the front page. 6 are critical of Obama, 4 are critical of McCain.
On any given day those ratios could be reversed.


Another good one is politifact.com
I like their scale that they use to measure the "truthiness" of what a candidate said. Their worst rating is "pants on fire" which McCain has received twice and Obama hasn't received at all.

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by kane

Example #1 - Gore V Bush 2000: Gore is basically handed the presidency on a silver platter. Clinton is very popular as he leave office and Gore is a sure thing.

Very false. The electorate had Clinton fatigue, Gore was at a disadvantage because while the economy was strong people were tired of the scandals and gridlock. Sitting VP's have a very hard time getting elected president. George HW Bush was the exception, not the rule.

Originally Posted by kane

Example #2 - Kerry V Bush 2004: Bush is very unpopular. The economy is in the shiter and things are looking bad for us globally. Kerry comes out strong and seems very presidential. The guy can speak and debates well and is a decorated military veteran. The Bush hits him with the swift boat stuff and Kerry, for reasons known only to him, decides he isn't going to fight back. Guess what? The people want to vote for someone that will fight for them and stand up for them and if Kerry won't defend himself how will he defend us? So, as we know, he loses.

Kerry didn't come out strong, the convention was a joke. He "almost" made up for it at the debates, but not quite.
He was not a very compelling candidate, but he was the best in a group of second tier candidates. (Notice that Clinton, Gore, Biden, etc all sat 2004 out?)
It's very very rare for an incumbent president to lose during wartime....and as much as people hate Bush now, you forget that he was pretty popular in 2004....AND at that time we still thought we would find WMD in Iraq, and that the Iraq war was justified.
Public opinion on those critical issues didn't turn until the 2006 election.

Also, Obama has proven again and again in this election cycle that he'll punch back, that he won't ignore an attack, no matter how idiotic the attack or attacker may be (see Jerome Corsi)


The rest of what you said was filled with even more distortions and misinformation than the shit I quoted above. You have no earthly idea what you're talking about.
Quit spitting out shit you heard in the barber shop as if it were fact.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by tony404

You are right, I remember as a kid the news wasn't entertainment it was very dry. Old men gave the news not their opinion.

Maybe it is just because you were young that it seemed dry [or unbiased]

[baddog]

Originally Posted by tony404

Use of the word rockstar makes it like its all very empty.He is a special guy that can connect with people on a large scale.

So was Rev Moon.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Very false. The electorate had Clinton fatigue,

yeah, that 65% approval rating was a tough stigma to carry into an election campaign.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by baddog

Maybe it is just because you were young that it seemed dry [or unbiased]

you are probably right, they always looked so grim when I was young. lol

[kane]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Very false. The electorate had Clinton fatigue, Gore was at a disadvantage because while the economy was strong people were tired of the scandals and gridlock. Sitting VP's have a very hard time getting elected president. George HW Bush was the exception, not the rule.

VP's don't always get elected, that is true. The real Clinton fatigue was by the Republicans who hated the Clintons and did everything they could to bring him down yet he still had a very high approval rating when he left office.

Kerry didn't come out strong, the convention was a joke. He "almost" made up for it at the debates, but not quite.
He was not a very compelling candidate, but he was the best in a group of second tier candidates. (Notice that Clinton, Gore, Biden, etc all sat 2004 out?)
It's very very rare for an incumbent president to lose during wartime....and as much as people hate Bush now, you forget that he was pretty popular in 2004....AND at that time we still thought we would find WMD in Iraq, and that the Iraq war was justified.
Public opinion on those critical issues didn't turn until the 2006 election.

Kerry came out of nowhere in the democratic primaries. He used a grass roots pound the pavement style in Iowa and it worked. Nobody suspected him and all the talk was of Dean and Kerry came out of nowhere. In a way he was a lot like Obama. Everyone assumed that Hillary had this all locked up and Obama really came on strong from the start. Kerry looked good right up until the swift boat attacks and he never really got back on track after that. I'm not saying that those attacks were the only reason he lost, but they were a major mistake for him.

Also, Obama has proven again and again in this election cycle that he'll punch back, that he won't ignore an attack, no matter how idiotic the attack or attacker may be (see Jerome Corsi)

I never said he wasn't willing to punch back.

The rest of what you said was filled with even more distortions and misinformation than the shit I quoted above. You have no earthly idea what you're talking about.
Quit spitting out shit you heard in the barber shop as if it were fact.

I don't go to a barber shop...I get all my political information from the bitches at the beauty parlor when we are all getting manicures